Schindl Marseille

The legal problems associated with Austria’s permanent neutrality are discussed in both Austrian and Russian international law literature controversially. Already the establishment of the Austrian neutrality in 1955 raises some legal questions. This article addresses — after an introduction to permanent neutrality as an institute of international law — the question of whether the Austrian neutrality is anchored in international law and, if so, on what legal basis that anchoring is based. By means of a comparative presentation of the Austrian and Soviet/Russian international law doctrine, an attempt is made to work out which of these various legal opinions appears justifiable from the view of the international law of neutrality. It will be shown that the obligations arising from Austria’s status of permanent neutrality go beyond those that are explicitly mentioned in the federal constitutional law on neutrality (Neutrality Act). Furthermore, it is presented that there are convincing reasons to argue for an anchoring of the Austrian neutrality in international treaty law in the Moscow Memorandum (April 1955) as well as in the State Treaty of Vienna (May 1955) and that the notification of the Neutrality Act provides another opportunity for a legal basis in international law. Furthermore, an attempt is made to show why the legal opinion which assumes that the Austrian neutrality is merely anchored in the Neutrality Act, and thus only on national law ground, has to be rejected.